Hi, welcome to the thread. This has been discussed.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
MASTER THREAD: FSD Subscription Available 16 Jul 2021
- Thread starter Adirondack_D
- Start date
GlockWorkOrnge
'20 Model Y Performance
There is not going to be a class action lawsuit over FSD and Full Self Driving computers.
CapeOne
Active Member
This is one of those things that seems more like Elon talk than reality. I don't buy that Tesla actually has a policy of not trying to make a profit on service regardless of what Musk may have said years ago during direct sales/franchise dealership legal battles.
CapeOne
Active Member
As has been pointed out, this "hardware" issue has been debated quite a bit in this thread. However, I agree that the Tesla statement you posted was at the very least misleading. If the cars truly "have the hardware needed for full self driving capability", no upgrades (free or otherwise, subscription or otherwise) should be necessary.
I honestly think the lane change treatment in AP is a deliberate impediment to the experience in order to 'fluff up' the appeal of the (current) FSD feature set.
I am in $29.99 per month club. That is all it is worth to me to be annoyed while babysitting the buggy FSD software.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Do you have any factual basis for your doubt? Can you cite anything from Teslas public financial disclosures, 10Q, etc, that suggests service is a profit center for the company?
I ask because to my knowledge of those financials, Tesla service has never made a profit in the entire history of the company- has in fact posted a small loss every year.
Which seems exactly in line with Elons 2013 statement.
So, your argument is that Tesla never wanted to make money on the HW3 upgrade? But after offering HW3 for "free" to FSD purchasers, HW3 for $500 to MCU1 upgraders, installing HW3 in ~1M cars, and over two years of planning to offer FSD subscriptions, on Friday July 16th, they thought this cost them $1500, but over the next two business days, they sharpened their pencils, and realized that it was only $1000, and this re-look at the pricing had zero to do with any customer backlash?
Tesla's constant price changes makes them look like a bunch of amateurs, and your argument for their rationale makes them look dumber, not smarter.
You know what Tesla also has a long standing policy of? "All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability"
So, your argument is that Tesla never wanted to make money on the HW3 upgrade? But after offering HW3 for "free" to FSD purchasers, HW3 for $500 to MCU1 upgraders, installing HW3 in ~1M cars, and over two years of planning to offer FSD subscriptions, on Friday July 16th, they thought this cost them $1500, but over the next two business days, they sharpened their pencils, and realized that it was only $1000, and this re-look at the pricing had zero to do with any customer backlash?
Tesla's constant price changes makes them look like a bunch of amateurs, and your argument for their rationale makes them look dumber, not smarter.
You know what Tesla also has a long standing policy of? "All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability"
I'm really confused about people being upset when they have to pay to upgrade their hardware. When you purchased the vehicle you could pay for FSD and get any required hardware and software updates for free, or save your money. Fast forward and Tesla determined a computer upgrade is required to achieve the results they're shooting for - everyone that already paid for the feature gets it free, and those that chose to go the cheaper route can keep their cars the way they are or pay a relatively small amount out of pocket to upgrade. Or, the option is still available to purchase FSD outright and you'll get the hardware upgrade for free.
I don't buy the whole "I bought my car in 2018 and was told I would be able to use FSD via subscription and that I wouldn't have to pay any extra for hardware to do so". Correct me if I'm wrong, but the subscription was announced quite a bit later - probably after all new Model 3s did come with HW3. At the time of purchase people that currently have HW2.5 didn't know about the subscription and don't have any valid argument about being cheated out of FSD, since they opted not to pay for it initially.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
That's not "my argument" it's how Tesla service works.
They're inherently intending to NOT turn a profit on service.
And in all their years in business, they've taken a small loss every year on service.
That's not an opinion, it's a fact.
Which the folks currently complaining about wanting "free" hardware still have available to them as an option
That is a vaguely misleading claim.
If you're ALSO getting the MCU upgrade, it's $500 more if you don't have HW3. Obviously there's no extra labor involved there as there would be if you were ONLY getting a HW3 upgrade. Also no extra logistics or supply chain costs, since it's still a single part.
None of that is true for a standalone HW3 upgrade.
This is the same company that did:
"We aren't going to offer an SR Y"
"Hey the SR Y is for sale!"
"Actually never mind, we're stopping selling the SR Y"
Tesla does great engineering.
They don't really know how to business.
As a business? Yes it does.
Ever hear the saying never ascribe to malice what can explained by stupidity?
Hell even Elon himself said they applies to his own predictions about stuff
Honestly- the CORRECT way to handle the HW2.5 people would have been to require a 12 or 24 month subscription paid in full up front, no refunds (but same rate as everyone else)... then they get "free" HW3 upgrade.
But Tesla is terrible about back-end IT and billing.... Just getting this basic monthly subscription took them well over a year since it was initially mentioned by Elon.
Likewise premium connectivity subscriptions, again just a simple monthly charge, took them WAY over a year longer than originally intended.
They're very very bad at setting this stuff up.
So they went a simpler route and made all subs month to month but the HW an extra charge for the small % of fleet that needs it.
(plus then you'd have had regular HW3 customers upset THEY can't pay for longer than a month to lock in pricing, since it'll almost certainly be going up if/when city streets comes out wide)
@Knightshade - So they aren't great at business, can barely set up billing, but they are totally obeying their long term "policy" of not making money on service. It's not that they are incompetent at making money on service? And their price reduction from $1500 to $1000 is obviously tied to not making money on "service" (providing promised capabilities are not service), not that incompetence you mention, or maybe legal suddenly realizing they will have an issue on their hands, or the non-existent PR department seeing the negative vibe out with customers?
You're just making up stuff to justify things, and your arguments to defend the company are as all over the place as Tesla's policies.
You're just making up stuff to justify things, and your arguments to defend the company are as all over the place as Tesla's policies.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
You realize "vehicle service" and "Back end IT web/app billing" are entirely different parts of a business, right?
Because it's not looking like you do right now.
That could be either.
Most likely though it's the initial price quote was based on a mistake in the BACK END SYSTEM.
This has happened many times before
Back in 2016 there were HUGE HEADLINES about how Tesla had quoted a new Model X owner $2290 to replace a cracked windshield.
Guess what? It was a BACK END PRICING ERROR.
The part was actually $880, and they corrected it once it was pointed out.
Link:
Tesla Model X Windshield Replacement Cost Is Only $880
Turns out it costs only $880 to replace the massive windshield on the Tesla Model X.
insideevs.com
This is nonsensical.
How does "we cut the price 33%" do anything at all legally against a claim you owe someone something for free?
(Spoiler: it doesn't)
You appear to have your own special echo chamber here.
I'm citing sourced facts from previous Tesla policies and actual price cuts, as well as their own public financials about running service without a profit.
You're the one trying to ascribe to malice what is far more easily explained by incompetence.
CapeOne
Active Member
I didn't think Tesla broke out profit numbers for "service" versus other areas but even if they did and it showed losses (no profit), that still wouldn't mean they have a policy against making a profit on service. Lots of companies have lost money or had little to no profit but that didn't mean it was company policy.
Tesla has, however, reported things like "improvements in non-warranty maintenance services gross margins."
Unless I see one in writing, I will continue to seriously doubt the that Tesla has a specific company policy of not trying to make a profit on service.
willow_hiller
Well-Known Member
When I first looked at the upgrade it was bugged (claiming I needed Autopilot despite having having bought AP after delivery). They fixed this bug and updated the hardware price to $1,000 at the same time.
CapeOne
Active Member
This issue some are having is that Tesla had specifically stated at the time that the cars "have the hardware needed for full self driving capability." If that statement is true, why would there be a need for an upgrade to get FSD? According to Tesla, the cars already have the hardware for FSD.
linux-works
Active Member
linux-works
Active Member
they'd have to pay me more than $30 a month to babysit the beta fsd system.I am in $29.99 per month club. That is all it is worth to me to be annoyed while babysitting the buggy FSD software.
(you did mean that they pay you, right??)
It turned out not to be the case, and they provided everyone that elected to purchase FSD with a free upgrade, so there's no issue. The problem is that now, down the road, they're offering a totally different form of FSD in the form of a subscription - and the subscription requires (for some) hardware updates. It's semantics at this point - you can't change the fact that the computers need updated to meet the true demand of the system. The right thing to do is cover the cost of hardware updates for those that purchased FSD under the impression that they'd have it - and offer a path to upgrading for those that haven't spent any money on it yet. Instead of charging $1500 or $1000 to update the computer they could just as easily say its $499/month, or that it requires a 24 month contract - would that satisfy everyone? The fact is that there is a cost associated to get older vehicles to support it and it doesn't make sense that Tesla should have to carry that burden for people that elected to save money and not pay for the feature when they bought the car.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Yeah, that's what I suggested (some kind of minimum term) in threads that discussed HW3 upgrade before the subscription officially came out. Tesla's an idiot for not doing something that like that. While the recent lowering to $1k will probably get some off their backs, I don't think it'll really address things (they are still charging an explicit separate fee for HW upgrade). And giving it for free (with no minimum term) will piss off those that paid full price for FSD, as plenty did that specifically for the HW3 upgrade.
Similar threads
